This problem can be illustrated in the case of one of the participants. In the decision on administrative expulsion the individual was referred to as a national of Iraq from which he came to the Czech Republic more than 20 years ago. A month later, he was detained for the purpose of the execution of the administrative expulsion order. In the decision on detention, the Foreign Police (without any explanation) referred to his nationality as “XXX”. Eight months later, the Foreign Police issued another decision on administrative expulsion where he was referred to as a “stateless person”. Meanwhile, this person lodged an application for a tolerated stay visa with the MoI. In the decision on this application, the MoI referred to his nationality as “undetected”. In none of these decisions did the administrative bodies explain the considerations behind their nationality determination of the applicant. All the decisions were issued within one year. The nationality of the individual was identified in four different ways despite no factual change occurring during this period. Moreover, the Iraqi embassy confirmed several years ago that the person concerned was not their national. While information provided by foreign authorities is sometimes of central importance to determine statelessness93 and Iraq was the only country with which the individual had a relevant link, it could have been established to a “reasonable degree” that he is not considered as a national by any State under the operation of its law.94 The Supreme Administrative Court reproached the lack of transparency and arbitrariness of the administrative bodies’ approach when determining the nationality of this person in an action against that person’s detention: “In the detention proceedings, the applicant was identified as Iraqi national (…), on the other documents (…) the applicant’s nationality was referred to as “XXX” which indicates undetected nationality.” 95 A part of the police file was, according to the Court, a report issued by the Iraqi embassy in the Czech Republic stating that “it was evident that the applicant was not an Iraqi national”, because “the representative of the Iraqi embassy in Prague during the consular visit of the applicant (…) found out that he was not an Iraqi national, had no links to the Republic of Iraq and did not speak Iraqi dialect.”96 In addition, the interviews and analysed documents revealed that even in cases where the relevant authorities referred to the persons as stateless, they failed to give consideration to the obligations pursuant to the 1954 Convention and the specific aspects pertaining to statelessness in their decision-making. These stories show the vital importance of establishing procedures determining statelessness through legislation, which ensures fairness, transparency and clarity97 to both the individuals and authorities concerned. 5.5 Missing personal documents A substantial problem faced by the stateless persons interviewed during the research was the absence of identity documents and/or internationally recognised travel documents. Some persons interviewed during the research confirmed having an internationally recognised travel document – a Czech foreign national’s passport, a Palestinian passport, or a passport issued to Latvian non-citizens. However, the practical applicability and the scope of rights associated with these types of documents varied. Others had only a provisional document issued by the Czech authorities – the identity travel card – which contained either an exit visa or a tolerated stay visa. This document, however, lacked the machine-readable elements and, therefore, the possibility of using it to travel abroad was very limited. This fact also precluded the persons concerned in their efforts to comply with the State’s order and leave the Czech Republic. 93 UNHCR, Handbook on Protection of Stateless Persons, cited above, para. 96. 94 Ibid., paras. 91 and 92. 95 Supreme Administrative Court, judgment of 22. November 2017, no. 1 Azs 283/2017, para. 20. 96 Ibid., para. 21. 97 UNHCR, Handbook on Protection of Stateless Persons, cited above, para. 71. UNHCR Czech Republic 37